Federal agency in charge of immigration bringing 500 new jobs to Overland Park

Federal agency in charge of immigration bringing 500 new jobs to Overland Park

By KEVIN COLLISONThe Kansas City Star
Updated: 2012-11-13T17:39:15Z

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service plans to add 500 jobs to its already sizeable work force in the Kansas City area to handle the flood of paperwork prompted by a presidential order last summer.

The new jobs will be going to the Rosana Square center at 119th Street and Metcalf Avenue. The employees to be hired for the CIS national benefits center will occupy 106,000 square-feet vacated six years ago when hundreds of Internal Revenue Service workers were relocated to the new IRS processing center near Union Station.

Jason Klumb, regional administrator for the federal General Services Administration, said the new CIS employees will be located at a building in Rosana Square at 7600 W. 119th St. The new lease extends through 2021 and operations are expected to begin in mid-December.

The Citizenship and Immigration Service, the agency charged with overseeing lawful immigration once known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, already has a major presence on the Missouri side of the metropolitan area with about 1,900 employees. Most work at two facilities in Lee’s Summit, the CIS National Records Center and the National Benefits Center.

The additional federal jobs coming to the metro are partly the result of the flood of applications prompted by President Barack Obama’s decision in June to allow young undocumented immigrants to stay in the U.S. without being deported. The CIS began accepting applications for the program in mid-August.

At the time, the Associated Press reported the new policy would lead to more than 1 million applications during its first year with about 890,000 people being immediately eligible.

Klumb said the local GSA office was able to act quickly when the CIS put out its request for additional space last summer because it still controlled the area formerly occupied by the IRS at Rosana Square.

“It’s important to point out the CIS was looking nationally and wanted to move quickly in response the executive order,” Klumb said. “The GSA could not only meet the time frame they were looking for, but was also able to expand the lease to meet the new requirements.”

The presidential directive applied to illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. when they were under the age of 16 and are not over the age of 30. They must have resided in the country continuously for at least five years and can’t have been convicted of a felony or a significant or multiple misdemeanors.

To reach Kevin Collison, development reporter, call 816-234-4289 or email kcollison@kcstar.com. Follow him on Twitter @kckansascity.

Advocates of racial/ethnic affirmative action quotas typically travel under the benign-sounding banner of "diversity," so long as it doesn't involve a diversity of opinion. President Obama's executive order last Thursday, August 18 requiring federal departments and agencies to increase hiring and promotion of nonwhite minorities is yet another example. The mandate, Executive Order 13583, is titled, "A Coordinated Government-Wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce." One notices words such as "efficiency" and "accountability" didn't make the cut. That's because over its four decades, "diversity" from the start has been about the allocation of economic rewards through force and guilt. The result most likely will be a federal bureaucracy committed more fully to racial payback.

There is a certain poetic justice here. In May, I wrote a lengthy article for National Legal and Policy Center, "New Report Shows Federal Race Preferences More Entrenched," centering on a then-new report issued by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) documenting the continued growth in federal affirmative action regulations. A previous CRS review, released in 1995, which was the last time Congress gave serious consideration to undoing these rules, revealed the existence of 172 such requirements. That figure had grown to 276 by this spring. Rules governing such program categories as Agriculture, Defense, and Health & Human Services more than ever stipulate that agencies and/or their beneficiaries demonstrate preference toward nonwhites and/or women in hiring, contracts, grants and other benchmark. Affirmative action, in other words, never went way. More to the point, the natural opponents of affirmative action, white "conservatives," did go away; they shied away from challenging its core assumptions.

Affirmative action - or "diversity" - should be seen as a form of what economists call "rent-seeking behavior." That is, it enables certain people to realize benefits through State intervention that would be less obtainable through the market. Supporters claim that blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other "disadvantaged" classes of persons need enforceable mechanisms to compensate for a legacy of blocked opportunity. By establishing mandatory goals and timetables, whether in percentages or absolute numbers, they argue, our society can ensure more equitable group outcomes. Contractual liberty for firms and individuals, as this logic has it, must be subordinate to social equality.
If mandatory affirmative action is at odds with the principles of a free society, why do so few supporters of freedom challenge it? A good short answer is this: Fear. They are fearful of being publicly stigmatized as racist (if white) or backstabbers (if nonwhite). To be known as an enemy of diversity in today's multiculturalism-obsessed America, as a career move, is tantamount to being banished to Siberia. Few want to see their income or social standing go up in smoke over some stray comment, let alone sustained argument, about race that even appears at odds with pronouncements by anointed nonwhite leaders. And formal organizations generally have to play along. My NLPC article this spring argued as much:

Affirmative action operates on a presumption of collective grievance. Even if individuals within a privileged class - e.g., whites - haven't disparaged the rights of nonwhites, they still owe their good fortune to past acts of discrimination imposed by their class. All white success, in this view, in some measure is a legacy of injustice. Affirmative action has succeeded over the years because members of putatively privileged groups, especially white males, have been made to feel a strong sense of guilt. Under this new regime of rights, an employer, contractor or college can't simply be race-neutral in its decisions; it also must take proactive steps to boost its percentage or numerical representation of underserved groups to a level authorities deem appropriate.

The Obama administration, from the President on down, operates on such a presumption. Thus, the long-awaited new executive order was less a question of "if" than of "when." Since federal agencies mandate Diversity, it is only logical, from the administration's standpoint, that they be staffed more heavily by Diversity's natural supporters: nonwhites.
President Obama's Executive Order 13583 is divided into four sections. The first, "Policy," treats the need for racial/ethnic diversity as given:

Our Nation derives strength from the diversity of its population and from its commitment to equal opportunity for all. We are at our best when we draw on the talents of all parts of our society, and our greatest accomplishments are achieved when diverse perspectives are brought to bear to overcome our greatest challenges.

A commitment to equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion is critical for the Federal Government as an employer. By law, the Federal Government's recruitment policies should "endeavor to achieve a work force from all segments of society." (5 U.S.C. 2301(b)(1)). As the Nation's largest employer, the Federal Government has a special obligation to lead by example. Attaining a diverse, qualified work force is one of the cornerstones of the merit-based civil service...

Wherever possible, the Federal Government must also seek to consolidate compliance efforts established through related or overlapping statutory mandates, directions from Executives Orders, and regulatory requirements. By this order, I am directing executive departments and agencies to develop and implement a more comprehensive, integrated and strategic focus on diversity and inclusion as a key component of their human resource strategies. This approach should include a continuing effort to identify
and adopt best practices, implemented in an integrated manner, to promote and remove barriers to equal employment opportunity, consistent with merit system principles and applicable law.

Let's cut through the circumlocution: President Obama is telling every federal agency to raise its percentage of blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other racial minorities or heads will roll. The possibility that the result of this ultimatum would be a less efficient and more politicized federal work force apparently is not a subject fit for discussion.

The second part of the executive order, "Government-Wide Diversity and Inclusion and Strategic Plan," lays out a framework for action. While the order does not create a new agency, it would bring together top officials for establishing broad initiatives. These officials would consist of the director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the deputy director for management of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in coordination with the President's Management Council (PMC) and the chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The group would be responsible for creating a government-wide plan within 90 days, to be followed by agency-specific plans within 120 days. Evaluation benchmarks would include recruitment, training and promotion.

This is the latest in a series of presidential executive orders proposing a strong dose of affirmative action for the federal bureaucracy. On October 12, 2000, President Clinton issued Executive Order 13171 directed at executive departments and agencies to recruit and advance the careers of Hispanics. Clinton also issued Executive Order 13078 (March 13, 199 and Executive Order 13163 (July 26, 2000), increasing preference for hiring persons with disabilities. And President Obama on November 9, 2009 issued Executive Order 13518 requiring the establishment of a Veterans Employment Initiative.

Federal officials and lawmakers are positively enthusiastic about the new mandate, Executive Order 13583, especially given that much of its focus is on race. Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry stated, "Rather than create a new structure, the president has built upon an existing structure at the very highest level that will get attention and scrutiny." Berry, speaking this past Monday in Boston at the annual conference of Blacks in Government (BIG), termed the executive order "a great leap forward." OPM Deputy Director Christine Griffin puts it this way: "We are trying to say that this is something that should be folded into and a part of everything you do." Black Congressman Danny Davis, D-Ill., proclaimed: "Agencies will pay attention to an executive order. I know it's been a snail's pace, and I'm quick to agree with those who say we have not moved fast enough."

Heads of pro-diversity federal employee organizations are even more strident. Jorge Ponce, co-chairman of the Council of Federal Equal Employment Opportunity and Civil Rights Executives, in a recent e-mail, demanded "an action-oriented agenda" to boost Hispanic representation in the Senior Executive Service. "No more councils. No more reports. No more statistics. No more paralysis!" William Brown, president of the African American Executive Association, called President Obama's executive order "a call to arms...for agencies to get serious."

Diversity enthusiasts often cite data to support their sense of entitlement. But the numbers appear to undermine than augment their case. According to the Office of Personnel Management, federal employees in fiscal year 2010 consisted of: 66.2 percent non-Hispanic white; 17.7 percent black; 8.0 percent Hispanic; 5.6 percent Asian and Pacific Islander; and 1.8 percent American Indian. In other words, 33.8 percent of federal employees were members of a minority group. Now here is a telling statistic from the 2010 Census: Non-Hispanic whites constituted 63.8 percent of the U.S. population, down from 69.5 percent in 2000. Thus, 36.2 percent of all persons last year belonged to a minority. The minority-group federal work force reasonably mirrors the composition of the population as a whole. Blacks, if anything, are overrepresented.

Affirmative action/diversity supporters counter that minorities are well below par at senior-level pay grades. The Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program Report for fiscal 2010 shows that blacks comprised 6.7 percent of senior-level positions and Hispanics accounted for 4.1 percent. Women, regardless of race, constituted 31.2 percent. Those numbers don't reflect the demographic makeup nationwide. But in and of themselves, they reveal little. Let's go over a few inconvenient reality checks on egalitarian zeal.

First, most senior-level federal employees are career hires or non-career, non-political hires. Civil service protections guard an employee's job from arbitrary political decisions. Moreover, if agency heads have an incentive to convert a senior employee's status, if anything it is from political to civil service, so as to avoid termination by an incoming administration (a practice known in Washington as "burrowing"). These facts act as brakes against racial/ethnic diversity enthusiasm. For even in the Age of Obama, white career civil servants can't simply be pushed out of their jobs to make way for less experienced nonwhites - the uproar among federal employees would be deafening, if only out of self-interest. The hiring of nonwhites and women, insofar as it fulfills affirmative action requirements, typically occurs only after slots become vacant, whether through job change or retirement. Attrition, by its nature, is a slow process. One does not simply demand action and cry "foul" when desired results don't quickly materialize. Even assuming that boosting the presence of nonwhite minorities is somehow desirable, it would take several years, and more likely at least a decade, even to approach diversity goals.

Second, senior-level federal positions typically require a highly specialized set of skills requiring a graduate or other advanced degree, plus a sizable number of years of work experience at progressive levels of responsibility. Anyone who ever has applied for even a middle-level federal job knows the bar is set high. Affirmative action won't necessarily deliver results. Example: formal education. Blacks and Hispanics as a whole have lower levels of higher education attainment. Whereas about 28 percent of all adults age 25 or older in the U.S. held at least a bachelor's degree in 2009, this figure was only 17 percent for blacks and 13 percent for Hispanics. Even if graduation rates across the races could be equalized overnight, it still would take years to achieve diversity goals. A job applicant, however qualified on paper, as a matter of course doesn't simply jump into a high-level federal post at age 25 or even 30.

Third, background checks are required for virtually every professional-level position within the federal government. And they have become more thorough in the decade since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, especially in agencies that deal with national security. A job applicant can expect to have his or her professional and personal life thoroughly vetted by investigators. Here is a partial listing of the information that federal job-seekers can expect to be gathered: criminal record, bankruptcies, credit reports, education transcripts, military record, sex offender lists, employment records, employment references, character references, family member interviews, drug test records, property ownership and state licensing board records. This doesn't even include the extensive paperwork that must be completed before an investigation begins. The comprehensive nature of background checks assures that even a lot of good applicants get weeded out. Much black "underrepresentation" can be attributed to the prospect of a criminal background check alone. As Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald has noted in scrupulous detail, blacks, though comprising only an eighth of the U.S. population, account for far higher percentages of arrests for violent crimes. It would be dangerous folly to bend the rules here just to achieve desired statistical outcomes.

Affirmative-action bean counters aren't pondering these and other factors (e.g., the limited English-speaking proficiency of many foreign-born and even U.S.-born Hispanics). To the contrary, they are cautioning that the executive order is merely "a first step." With Barack Obama as president and Eric Holder as attorney general, these enthusiasts see their long-awaited moment at hand. These activists are obsessed with boosting the nonwhite portion of the federal bureaucracy, especially in supervisory positions, where hiring is done. Nonwhites, once hired, would be virtually impossible to fire. The result would be a government far more accountable to racial/ethnic politicians and shakedown artists than to the general public.
Such a mindset is contrary to the public interest because it diminishes the importance of merit as the primary basis for hiring, retention and promotion. Character traits that make for good employees - competence, flexibility, punctuality, integrity and intellect - would matter less. But the diversity obsession is counterproductive for another reason: It assumes government is an employer of the first resort. In this view, a given federal agency owes an applicant a job because that person belongs to a favored race or ethnic group. Common sense would hold that the result will be an enlarged and less accountable government. That's something few can afford at a time of record-high deficits. But President Obama is a man who knows his political constituents. And he knows they're high on Diversity.Obama Issues Executive Order Mandating Racial Favoritism | National Legal and Policy Center

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service is adding 800 jobs to its already sizeable work force in the Kansas City area to help with the increased workload the agency has picked up system wide since a presidential order last summer.

Five hundred of the new jobs will be going to Rosana Square at 119th Street and Metcalf Avenue in Overland Park. The 300 others will be added to an existing immigration service facility in Lee’s Summit at 850 N.W. Chipman Road.

All hiring will be for the agency’s national benefits center operation and will be completed within 10 months.

The new Overland Park employees will occupy a building at 7600 W. 119th St. That space was vacated six years ago when hundreds of Internal Revenue Service workers moved to the new IRS processing center near Union Station. The employees in Lee’s Summit will join the current benefits staff at the Chipman Road facility.

The immigration service already has a big presence on the Missouri side of the metro with about 1,900 employees. Most work at two facilities in Lee’s Summit, the national records center at 150 N.W. Space Center Loop and the national benefits center on Chipman Road.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, once called the Immigration and Naturalization Service, is the federal agency charged with overseeing lawful immigration.

Employees at the Kansas City-area operations generally process applications for immigrants applying to replace their alien registration cards, better known as green cards, or applying to bring relatives to the United States.

The additional full-time jobs coming to the area indirectly result from President Barack Obama’s decision in June to let young undocumented immigrants stay in the U.S. The immigration service began accepting deferred action applications for the program in mid-August.

At the time, the Associated Press reported that the new policy would lead to more than 1 million applications in its first year with about 890,000 people being immediately eligible.

The new Kansas City area employees won’t be handling those specific applications, but they will be helping relieve the workload the presidential order created overall at the agency.

The presidential directive applied to illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. when they were under the age of 16 and are not over the age of 30. They must have lived in the country continuously for at least five years and can’t have been convicted of a felony, or significant or multiple misdemeanors.

Jason Klumb, regional administrator for the federal General Services Administration, said his office was able to act quickly when the immigration service put out its request for additional space last summer because it still controlled the area formerly occupied by the IRS at Rosana Square.

“It’s important to point out the USCIS was looking nationally and wanted to move quickly,” Klumb said Tuesday. “The GSA could not only meet the time frame they were looking for, but was also able to expand the lease to meet the new requirements.”

Timothy J. Counts, a spokesman for the immigration service, said the hiring will roll out through mid-2013.

“We were looking nationally and it was the GSA that came up with this facility that met our needs well,” Counts said.

The salary range for the federal jobs will be from $27,431 to $41,563.

Applicants should go to the online government job site,www.USAjobs.gov, and enter the keyword “USCIS” along with a geographic location such as Kansas City or local ZIP code.

Klumb said the lease for the expanded national benefits center at Rosana Square extended through 2021, and operations were expected to begin in mid-December.

“It’s great news for Overland Park and the metropolitan area,” said Sean Reilly, a spokesman for the city. “Overland Park has added 3,000 jobs this year and we’re slowly recovering like many other cities.”

Jim Devine, executive director of the Lee’s Summit Economic Development Corp., said the federal immigration agency has been a big employer there for years.“Any time you can add new jobs in this economy that are good paying and long-term, that’s good for everybody,” he said.

To reach Kevin Collison, development reporter, call 816-234-4289 or email kcollison@kcstar.com. Follow him on Twitter @kckansascity.